CVE-2025-10230
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA flaw was found in Samba, in the front-end WINS hook handling: NetBIOS names from registration packets are passed to a shell without proper validation or escaping. Unsanitized NetBIOS name data from WINS registration packets are inserted into a shell command and executed by the Samba Active Directory Domain Controller’s wins hook, allowing an unauthenticated network attacker to achieve remote command execution as the Samba process.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThis is a command injection vulnerability in Samba's WINS (Windows Internet Name Service) hook functionality. Unauthenticated attackers can send specially crafted NetBIOS name registration packets to a Samba Active Directory Domain Controller. The NetBIOS names are inserted directly into a shell command without validation or escaping, allowing arbitrary command execution as the Samba process user.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Samba installation and versionRun 'smbd --version' or 'samba --version' to determine the installed Samba version. Compare against the fixed version once released by the vendor.Affected if Running an unpatched Samba version that contains the WINS hook command injection flaw
-
Locate Samba configuration fileThe primary configuration file is typically located at /etc/samba/smb.conf. Verify this file exists and is readable.Affected if Samba is configured on the system with a writable smb.conf file
-
Verify WINS hook functionality is enabledSearch the smb.conf file for the 'wins hook' parameter. If this parameter is present and uncommented, the WINS hook functionality is enabled.Affected if The 'wins hook' directive is active in smb.conf, exposing the vulnerable code path to network attackers
-
Confirm if system functions as an AD Domain ControllerIn smb.conf, look for 'server role = active directory domain controller' or 'domain controller = yes' to determine if Samba is operating as a Domain Controller.Affected if The system is configured as a Samba AD DC with WINS hook enabled, making it directly reachable to unauthenticated attackers
A user is affected if they are running an unpatched Samba version with the WINS hook functionality enabled on a Samba AD Domain Controller exposed to network access.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataDisable the WINS hook functionality if not required, or apply vendor patches immediately. If WINS hook is essential, implement strict input validation and proper shell escaping for NetBIOS name data before executing any shell commands.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-10230 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-10230 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data